How the Olympic Marathon Trials Site is Selected

It's widely expected that in the near future Houston or Los Angeles will be announced as the site of the 2016 U.S. Olympic Marathon Trials. The competition between the two cities to host the event has been marked by accusations that the board and CEO of USA Track & Field have ignored USATF's rules for choosing the site.

That controversy is unfounded, says Jill Geer, chief of public affairs for USATF, because USATF's rules don't codify how Olympic Trials sites are to be selected.

A bit of background: At USATF's annual meeting in December, controversy arose over changes to Regulation 18, which has to do with how sites for national championships are chosen. Although the changes weren’t proposed and passed made with the Olympic Trials in mind, the distance-running community at the meeting was concerned about how the changes would affect the 2016 marathon trials site selection. Earlier at the meeting, a five-person committee charged with recommending the marathon trials site unanimously favored Houston.

But Regulation 18 is irrelevant to the marathon trials, Geer says, because while Olympic Trials often double as national championships, they're not required to. Moreover, Geer says, USATF bylaws don't stipulate how Olympic Trials sites are chosen because the Olympic Trials are a property of the U.S. Olympic Committee, not USATF.

"The U.S. Olympic Team Trials are not addressed in our bylaws," Geer told Runner's World Newswire by email. "USATF cannot legislate governance for events we do not own."

"The U.S. Olympic Team Trials are a USOC property," Geer wrote. "USATF administers the event on behalf of the USOC but the USOC owns all rights to the event. USATF can choose to designate the Trials as our USATF Championship, but the Trials themselves are not by USOC definition a USATF event or championship."

So how is the marathon trials site picked? Geer describes a fairly subjective process that results in USATF recommending a location to the USOC.

"The Olympic Trials have a different consideration set than any USATF championship, on the road or track. These considerations include the USOC and its Olympic properties portfolio, a rights-paying, rights-holding broadcast partner in NBC, and USOC sponsors.

"USATF’s considerations include what will yield the best Olympic team, elevate the profile of the sport, be in the best interest of the sport overall and enhance financial support for athlete programs, among many others. The first is in the purview of our committees as well as the USOC High Performance Department, while the latter are the responsibilities of [USATF's] national office.

"Each Olympic Trials award takes into consideration all these USOC and USATF factors, and many others. In different Olympiads, the relative weight of these factors may shift depending on when and where the Olympics are being held, what the bids look like or a given year’s broadcast schedule or any number of other factors."

In this view, the unanimous committee vote in favor of Houston had to do primarily with athletes' considerations, and is one of several factors in deciding what to propose to the USOC.

Jim Estes, USATF's director of events, says he's unaware of an instance in which USATF's proposed site for an Olympic Trials wasn't agreed to by the USOC.

Estes and Geer characterize the process for selecting the 2016 marathon trials as unique because it's the first time two major cities are bidding for the event with the same proposed model.

In 2012, Houston simultaneously hosted the men's and women's marathon trials. It was the first time the two races were held on the same day, and the reaction was overwhelmingly positive from contenders, spectators, media and others. Houston's and Los Angeles' bids for 2016 propose repeating that format, on a multiple-loop criterium course, which was used in Houston in 2012. In both cases, the marathon trials would be held the same weekend as the city's major mass-participation marathon.

For the 2012 marathon trials, Houston did have some competiton, in that Boston and New York City proposed to switch roles from the 2008 trials, when New York hosted the men and Boston the women. But, Geer and Estes say, Houston's bid for a joint trials was seen to be much more attractive.

The decision makers "were in agreement that a combined Trials would broaden the impact of the event for the athletes, the USOC, USATF and the event itself," Estes says about Houston in 2012. "The choice was quite obvious to all involved with making the decision."

That's not the case this time. The process for selecting the site could certainly be less opaque. But the fact that there's enough interest and competition to lead to controversy is a positive, in that they indicate the marathon trials are an increasingly valued event.

Scott DouglasScott is a veteran running, fitness, and health journalist who has held senior editorial positions at Runner’s World and Running Times.

A Part of Hearst Digital Media
Runner's World participates in various affiliate marketing programs, which means we may get paid commissions on editorially chosen products purchased through our links to retailer sites.